your thorn -- or His Cross

I saw this cartoon http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3hs2cN82s1ql5tkgo1_1280.jpg  in the most recent “Christianity Today” and for some reason got thinking about the difference between “a thorn in the flesh”, and “picking up your cross”. The sponge in this cartoon could be replaced by a purple dinosaur (anybody remember Barney?), a spouse, child, co-worker, in-law, a bad back, or a yapping dog that the neighbors leave out in the yard. That person, thing, annoyance is a thorn, not a cross.

We’ve all heard someone say that we all have our cross to bear, but the tendency seems to be to apply the term to things that are really pretty minor compared to what Jesus meant when he said to pick up a cross and follow. The cross in Jesus’ time was a symbol of torture, it was reserved for notorious criminals, and when Jesus said to pick up a cross and follow, he was basically saying if you’re going to follow me, you have to understand that this cross might be your destiny…you’re going to have to buck the system, and in my name you’re going to make some people unhappy. There is going to be suffering, and it will be because you’re one of my disciples.  Think Peter being crucified upside down, or James being beheaded.

The thorn in the flesh, on the other hand, has more of a sense of annoyances, inconveniences, things that distract us, get in the way of carrying out the mission that Jesus has given us. Paul asked god to remove the thorn, and God said that His grace was sufficient, Paul managed to continue working on the things that Christ Jesus had given him to do.

When we confuse the thorn and the cross, we magnify our part in the story at the expense of the Cross and Jesus’ part in God’s plan for all of us.

I’m wondering what I’m confusing for my cross.

 How about you? Is there a thorn in your side that you want to call the cross that you’re carrying for Jesus?

review: The Jesus Mission

Steven K. Scott, in The Jesus Mission (Waterbrook Press, 2011) talks a lot about the missions that Jesus accomplished, and the ones that have been left for us . He walks us through what he calls the four missions that Jesus assigned us: intimacy with God; accelerated personal growth; empowering other believers; and impacting the lives of non-believers.


To be honest, if I had gotten this book from the library, I probably would have returned it mostly unread, but I had agreed to read the book for the purpose of writing a review, so I stuck it out, and I’m actually glad I did since there are some interesting nuggets buried within the pages.

Although the book is full of scripture references to back up the author’s points, it’s not written by a theologian, and at times it seemed disjointed to me. At times I felt like I was at a men’s conference since many sections end with ‘action points’. Other parts of the book seem like a ‘how to’. Part theology, part theory, part self-help, and a little bit of the author’s personal opinion.

Opinion is good, but even as he writes “He [Jesus] does not give people the option of recasting Him to suit their agenda,” and states that Jesus is a favorite subject of people who want to rewrite history and refashion it to suit their own purposes, Scott spends part of a chapter showing how liberal thinkers such as then Senator Obama were totally off target when they wanted to “spread the wealth around.” That probably wouldn’t have caught my attention except for the fact that Scott’s bio on the dust jacket lists him as an “entrepreneur whose start-up companies have achieved billions of dollars in sales”. No wonder he thinks Jesus wouldn’t be in favor of redistribution of wealth.

There is some good stuff in this book, but it could have all been said in a much shorter book.

I’ll give this book a 3/5.

I received a copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.

OTC meds

as i was going from point A to point B this morning, the radio in the car was on. My kid likes one station, I like another, but the news channel i like is generally pretty repetitive, so we listen to his choice a lot, and when i'm in the car alone, it's news.

a big story today is that many people think that certain meds, cholesterol, blood pressure, diabetes, to name a few should be over the counter. There are 2 pharmacists where i get my prescriptions filled and i would trust either of them to advise me (THANKS, ERIC and STEVE at the Clinton Macy's) but....
we used to get a presecription for some kind of allergy medecine for my son.  The insurance covered the doctors visit (with a small co -pay) and there was a $3.00 co pay for a month's worth of pills. One day i went to get a refill, only to find that that medecine was now over-the-counter, so instead of a co-pay, i was allowed the privilege of buying it retail for $22.95 for the same 30 days worth of pills.

so now that everyone is forced to pay for insurance, a lot of meds will no longer be covered....something just doesn't sound right.

it should also concern us that people will avoid going to the doctor because the pharmacist at the local bigbox store is so much more convenient. Like i said, i trust the guys at the pharmacy i use, but i would rather them be filling my prescriptions than spending an hour with someone who doesn't want to or can't afford to pay to see a doctor.  and if i go ask about blood pressure medecine, the doc might actually look and find out that it's something else, while the pharmacist will probably just talk BP pills.

just sayin'